Guy Who Undressed For TSA Search (With 4th Amendment Written On Chest) Sues Over Airport Detention
from the this-won't-go-far dept
We've seen various ways that people have protested TSA searches, but for one guy who decided to undress (as he suggests, to help the TSA out) and, as a part of that, display the 4th Amendment written on his chest, it led to him being detained and told he was under arrest (though, he didn't miss his flight):![](https://i.imgur.com/0ClCD.jpg)
![Hide This Hide this](https://ii.techdirt.com/s/t/i/topclose.png)
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
No one NEEDS to go on vacation.
When the airline industry fails completely, things will get better.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Anonymous Coward
The TSA scans are clearly a violation of the Constitution. Just as Guantanamo is a violation of the Constitution. How can any president claim to exercise the power he GETS from the Constitution OUTSIDE that same Constitution. You'd have to be extremely dim to fall for that one......and it seems many Americans really are that "ill informed".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Anonymous Coward
Both parties suck. Anybody who thinks {party} is the problem isn't paying attention.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Anonymous Coward
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Anonymous Coward
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Anonymous Coward
However when the current government CONTINUES the practices of the previous one, and even expands them, then that argument is just void. Sorry the Obama administration IS responsible they have decided to continue with those policies.
Guantanamo Bay? Still open.
Afghanistan? We're still fighting there.
Iraq? We're still there too.
Unreasonable searches? We still have them.
Torture of suspects? Now also on US soil (See Bradley Manning).
Seizure of domain names? New under Obama to help his Hollywood friends.
Critical Officials? Resigned (doublespeak for Fired ) see: Mr. Crowley.
Basically the only difference between Obama and Bush is that Obama has better PR - even I still have a feeling that Obama is more sympathetic and trustworthy, but my brain tells me he may be more dangerous precisely for that reason, he can get away with things that Bush never could.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Anonymous Coward
I'd see your logic if you stepped up and held Barney Frank and the Dem laws and Congress that forced lenders to give bad loans to minorities and also claimed there were no problems. Yet you blamed Bush for that, too. Can't have it both ways
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm glad he's fighting
What I think we're seeing is that on an issue that very few complain about, the judiciary tends to be lazy and assume that the government must be right. When enough cases show up, they start paying more attention and then they look at the underlying issues, and start to say 'hey, wait a minute, this isn't right!'. Hopefully we'll get to that point soon.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'm glad he's fighting
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sympathy
In protest of laws that are being manipulated under the guise of our safety, he is manipulating laws that were created to prevent persecution and injustice...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sympathy
If the government doesn't have to pay anything, they don't have much of a disincentive to stop violating citizens' rights.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sympathy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sympathy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Sympathy
Isn't his point that he was subjected to persecution and injustice? I don't see how this is abusing those laws, can you clarify?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why Is It Always The Subversives Who Cite The Constitution?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: why Is It Always The Subversives Who Cite The Constitution?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The end of the bold text is "Demand for a Jury Trial".
Can a criminal complaint be filed against the TSA (or employee thereof) for false imprisonment? Can fun judgements be doled out against the org. as a whole?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The answer is yes.
Basically - if a TSA "officer" touches your junk after you tell them not to, you can have him arrested for assault.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
lETS NOT EVEN TALK ABOUT PERSONAL RIGHTS.
These folks have been held up EVEN more, then if they had wore clothing.
STRIP, walk thru, let them scan ALL your clothing(should be easy)(should be quick)..continue to plane.
Its the MORAL SNOBS that are having the most problem.
IMHO, GOD was a Voyeur.. And until the snake led them to the tree of knowledge...THEY didnt know they were NAKED. Wouldnt being NAKED please god?
The other point comes with the ABUSE, of these positions.. Stolen property, and RIDICULOUS procedures.
Scanning Pilots..as if that will stop them from PLOWING into the ground.
Independent tests..showing that you can get ANYTHING threw checkin..
Going beyond there JOB DESCRIPTION.. persons carrying Large amounts of money/CASH being STOPPED and QUESTIONED.
Even in the Koran.. YOU DONT USE KIDS..so why are we inspecting them. Women and children are forbidden from waging war. Those that use them are condemned BEYOND HELL.
On and on and on...
HOW about Searching persons AFTER they get off the trains..WEIRD.. Its to easy to destroy tracks, then to even be on the train.
All previous attacks were on GOVERNMENT locations/facilities, NOT on public locations. so why are the PUBLIC WORRIED.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: lETS NOT EVEN TALK ABOUT PERSONAL RIGHTS.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: lETS NOT EVEN TALK ABOUT PERSONAL RIGHTS.
(and yes you are A-NON)(could be worse, you could be A-Noid)
But which is better...
GET FELT UP by a Bi-Gay- Big GULP..
Or just STRIP and show it all..
WHY be detained?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: lETS NOT EVEN TALK ABOUT PERSONAL RIGHTS.
I'm not offended enough to report this, but I am offended enough to call you out on being an ignorant asshole.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: lETS NOT EVEN TALK ABOUT PERSONAL RIGHTS.
"Even in the Koran.. YOU DONT USE KIDS..so why are we inspecting them. Women and children are forbidden from waging war. Those that use them are condemned BEYOND HELL."
Care to explain, then, female suicide bombers? terrorists using children as human shields? and encouraging them to fight by throwing rocks at soldiers while said terrorists are shooting their automatics from behind them?
Just because it's "against" the Koran doesn't mean people don't do it. Infidelity is forbidden in all religions, and yet it's pretty wide spread, wouldn't you say?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Perhaps if he'd worked the pectoral area a little more...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
4th amendment underwear
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
WHO cares how you do it... STRIP..and go.
Why should PLACING your hands ALL OVER my body be a requirement?
Its already been shown that the Scanner dont work.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nope - *Government* by violating our 4th amendment rights are the ones breaking the law - both by definition and in concept.
Did government have a warrant to search anyone? No.
The 4th Amendment CLEARLY states it is in fact REQUIRED for them to - ******PERIOD****** - THAT IS THE LAW.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Note the part that clearly states: "Shall not be violated" - yet, it is.
But many buy the right wing 'it's for your own good' spin.
No, without our rights - this country isn't worth protecting now is it? 'America' is more of a concept than anything.
So again - who's breaking the law?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What Rights are you talking about here?
4th Amendment Rights?
Please stop this nonsense. Buy a plane tickets and you agree to waive these Rights. But if it make you feel better to think you are a constitutional scholar then carry on.
But I sure wish they would stop those searches so I will be able to ride on a plane again. I just refuse to fly because of the rules.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
As it is what is stopping the Transportation Security Administration from setting up roadblocks at the entrance to every neighborhood to search vehicles?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Oh please, show us where, ANYWHERE, this is codified in law or the constitution.
What a ridiculous load of garbage.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Buying anything can strip you of the 4th amendment?
WTF?!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://supreme.justia.com/constitution/amendment-14/96-right-to-travel.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Regardless, it's reasonable to assume that the TSA should be considered a state actor.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
CALL NOW
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
should have done it on his way back
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
He earned every moment of his detention.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Doesn't matter if you are in the legal right, doesn't matter if the government is trampling over your rights.
If you do anything that even expresses a disagreement with the government you deserve everything you get!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Last time I checked, there was no "right to fly commercial" in the constitution.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Fixed
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Again, can you remind me of which amendment of the constitution grants the "right to fly"?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Here�s one more item for you, the last in our civics book: Rights. Why everyone in this country is always running around yammering about their fuckin rights. I have a right, you have no right, we have a right, they don�t have a right� Folks, I hate to spoil your fun but�there�s no such thing as rights, okay? They�re imaginary. We made them up! Like the Boogie Man� the Three Little Pigs, Pinocchio, Mother Goose, shit like that. Rights are an idea, they�re just imaginary, they are a cute idea, cute� but that�s all, cute, and fictional. But if you think you do have rights, let me ask you this, where do they come from? People say, well, they come from God, they�re God-given rights� Ahh fuck, here we go again� here we go again. The God excuse. The last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument, it came from God. Anything we can�t describe, must have come from God.
For further inquiry onto your bloody rights check this out.
Ya want a true commandment; thou shall not force thy beliefs on others (thank GC for that one too and please read in the double entrende on that one if you please.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
No one said they had a 'right to fly.' They said they had a right not to be subjected to illegal search and seizure. You're twisting the argument around to make it look like you're right, when you are in fact entirely incorrect. And you know it.
'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'
There are no exceptions to this, no matter WHAT the courts try to say. There isn't even ROOM for interpretation otherwise.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Just because you maybe doing something that the constitution doesn't explicitly give you a right to do doesn't mean the govt gets to violate the rights the constitution does give you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Freedom of speech, freedom of assembly.
My point is that there is no specific "right to fly", and freedom of speech or assembly doesn't cover flying on a privately owned commercial aircraft.
If the guy doesn't like the rules, he doesn't have to fly.
Oh, and for the AC above, there is no "right to drive a car". Driving is an earned privilege, by passing your driving test, and owning (or renting / borrowing) a vehicle that meets the standards for being on the road. It is a privilege that can be revoke, removed or modified by changes in the law or because of your failures to follow them.
Rights are rights, privileges are not rights.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TSA Relentless, Invasive Searches
Why does Wal-Mart need (manned) spy towers on mobile strategic platforms when Wal-Mart has cameras on its Super Center Roofs viewing parking lots? One might conclude U.S. Government made possible the spy towers at certain Wal-Marts as a trial run, to condition, intimidate and instill in millions of Americans shoppers�they are being watched. It is problematic that Wal-Mart mobile platforms might in addition to cameras, have infrared, (license plate and face recognition capability) tied to TSA/Homeland Security. If that is the case, one can envision police coming to Wal-Marts to drag off shoppers that�mobile platform-cameras identified having outstanding warrants. Why is U.S. Government hurriedly developing a police state? The Government is now using hundreds of (mobile X-ray vans) to scan without warrants�Citizens driving on roadways, when walking, standing�government and police can now use scanners to peer inside Citizens� bedrooms.
Is it only the War On Terrorism or is there another reason U.S. Government intends to establish millions of spy cameras on roadways, on public and private property? Meanwhile the Obama Government is ordering more X-ray scanners for airports; soon bus and train stops, the possibilities are endless? TSA has banned Americans flying without explanation; could government next blacklist Americans having access to enter shopping malls or private office buildings, even to see clients; or make it extremely demeaning that he or she visitor must be escorted in and out of non-government property?
One can also envision outspoken Americans and writers considered dissidents or combatants by U.S. Government, subsequently being harassed, constantly questioned by police when driving to work, at checkpoints, when walking, driving around a City�being repeatedly forced to endure invasive pat down searches and x-ray scans. It is frightening to consider that a corrupt U.S. Government or quasi government agency could abuse government X-ray scanners, potentially over expose (targeted Citizens) to radiation�perhaps causing recipients cancer. Imagine the potential of over exposure for "Persons Of Interests� if repeatedly (forced to be scanned) at checkpoints and other locations.
See Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVQRMrlQ95U
�Mobile Prison Guard Towers Coming to a Walmart near You! Unbelievable�
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It still comes to..
YOU HAVE THE RIGHT not to be felt up..
HERE ARE MY CLOTHES, search them..I will walk thru naked.
WHY the delay?
TSA, isnt there to FIND MONEY.
TSA, isnt there to find DRUGS..
TSA, has failed most-all independent tests, hiding things from them..
The only things STOPPED, has been reported on international Flights. NONE have been reported in this country.
If I was a terrorist, I would DRIVE A RENTED/Borrowed/Stolen CAR.
All incidents happened in Major metro areas.
ALL incidents happened to Military/WTO buildings. Even the twin towers were the high point in the USA used at some point to listen to Earth based signals, for the CIA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It still comes to..
Just because they haven't set off nerve gas in the dc subway doesn't mean they WON'T (Japan)
just because they haven't set off a bomb in said location doesn't mean they WON'T (UK)
Just because they haven't blown up school buses full of children and attacked kindergartens doesn't mean that they WON'T (Israel)
Mind you, I'm all FOR what this guy did, and would love to try it myself (looking into those metallic printed Tees), but PLEASE, FOR THE LOVE OF ANYTHING THAT YOU MAY IN PARTICULAR HOLD TO BE PERSONALLY SACRED (following the aforementioned "commandment" as quoted from GC in Utah Chris' post) STOP THIS US-CENTRIC NARROWMINDEDNESS. THE WORLD OUTSIDE EXISTS. DEAL WITH IT.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Trying to prove the search is unreasonable would be very difficult, if not impossible. As soon as he fails there, the rest of his (amusingly arrogant) case falls to pieces.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
HOWEVER, the government doesn't have the right to detain you for for merely reciting (or paraphrasing) the constitution in a non-violent non confrontational way. I don't see that he resisted the search or was in any way less than cooperative. The problem is the detention, not the search.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
HOWEVER, the government doesn't have the right to detain you for for merely reciting (or paraphrasing) the constitution in a non-violent non confrontational way. I don't see that he resisted the search or was in any way less than cooperative. The problem is the detention, not the search.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
HOWEVER, the government doesn't have the right to detain you for for merely reciting (or paraphrasing) the constitution in a non-violent non confrontational way. I don't see that he resisted the search or was in any way less than cooperative. The problem is the detention, not the search.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
HOWEVER, the government doesn't have the right to detain you for for merely reciting (or paraphrasing) the constitution in a non-violent non confrontational way. I don't see that he resisted the search or was in any way less than cooperative. The problem is the detention, not the search.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sorry to break it up to you people but the reality is that this is another piece of proof that the constitution was and still is actually written for the elite bourgeoisie not everyone else below them (poor/working classes/"middle classes") along with members of the Supreme Court are able to pass the TSA scans because the constitution is actually written for them not us.
The constitution is not a holy document that everyone makes it out to be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sorry to break it up to you people but the reality is that this is another piece of proof that the constitution was and still is actually written for the elite bourgeoisie not everyone else below them (poor/working classes/"middle classes") along with members of the Supreme Court are able to pass the TSA scans because the constitution is actually written for them not us.
The constitution is not a holy document that everyone makes it out to be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Really?
You mean, a government judge might not be impressed by someone trying to take legal action against that very same government? Gee, do you really think so?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sexual Assault done by Airport Security
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
unjust laws and constitutional rights
The Constitution only gives people the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself.
The strictest law sometimes becomes the severest injustice.
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Those who govern, having much business on their hands, do not generally like to take the trouble of considering and carrying into execution new projects. The best public measures are therefore seldom adopted from previous wisdom, but forced by the occasion.
Where liberty is, there is my country.
Where sense is wanting, everything is wanting.
Quotes by Benjamin Franklin
[ link to this | view in chronology ]